Case Note & Summary
The present application was filed by the applicants, who were arrayed as accused Nos. 1 to 4 in Criminal Inquiry No. 13 of 2018 pending before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Danta, seeking quashing of the order dated 16.09.2021 and all proceedings arising therefrom. The complaint was filed by respondent No. 2, the original complainant, alleging offences under Sections 406 and 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The complainant claimed to be a Shishya (disciple) of the deceased Mahant Shri Raghavsharanji Maharaj and residing at Raghavdham Ashram, Harivav. Upon the demise of the Mahant, the complainant alleged that he was appointed as the testamentary successor under a Will dated 26.09.2008. The complaint alleged that the accused took possession of a Bolero car and other properties of the ashram and threatened the complainant with death. The applicants contended that the dispute was purely civil in nature regarding succession to the ashram properties and that the criminal complaint was filed maliciously to pressurize them. The State and the complainant opposed the quashing, arguing that the allegations disclosed criminal offences. The High Court examined the complaint and found that the allegations did not satisfy the essential ingredients of criminal breach of trust under Section 406 IPC, as there was no entrustment of property by the complainant to the accused. The court also noted that the threat alleged under Section 506(2) IPC was vague and unsupported by evidence. The court held that the dispute was essentially a civil dispute over property succession and that criminal proceedings were an abuse of the process of law. Consequently, the court allowed the application and quashed the impugned order dated 16.09.2021 and all proceedings in Criminal Inquiry No. 13 of 2018.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure Code - Quashing of FIR - Section 482 CrPC - Abuse of Process - Dispute pertained to succession of a deceased Mahant's ashram properties - Complainant claimed to be testamentary successor under a Will, but allegations of criminal breach of trust and intimidation were found to be civil in nature - Court held that criminal proceedings cannot be used as a tool for recovery of property or to settle civil disputes - Quashed the complaint and all proceedings (Paras 1-10). B) Indian Penal Code - Criminal Breach of Trust - Section 406 IPC - Essential Ingredients - Entrustment of property and dishonest misappropriation - Allegations that accused took possession of a Bolero car and other properties after Mahant's death - Court found no evidence of entrustment by complainant or dishonest intention - Held that mere civil dispute over succession does not constitute criminal breach of trust (Paras 2-8). C) Indian Penal Code - Criminal Intimidation - Section 506(2) IPC - Threat to Cause Injury - Complainant alleged accused threatened to kill him - Court noted that the threat was vague and not substantiated by any independent evidence - Held that in the absence of clear threat causing reasonable apprehension of injury, offence under Section 506(2) is not made out (Paras 2-8).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the criminal proceedings for offences under Sections 406 and 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 arising out of a property succession dispute between religious disciples should be quashed as an abuse of process of law.
Final Decision
The application is allowed. The impugned order dated 16.09.2021 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Danta, in Criminal Inquiry No. 13 of 2018 and all proceedings arising therefrom are quashed and set aside. Rule is made absolute. Consequently, Criminal Misc. Application No. 1 of 2022 for vacating interim relief is disposed of as having become infructuous.
Law Points
- Criminal breach of trust requires entrustment of property
- criminal intimidation requires threat to cause injury to person/reputation
- civil disputes over property succession not to be criminalized
- quashing under Section 482 CrPC for abuse of process
